DOJ Says UN Arms Treaty Trumps US Constitution

butcherguy

AlienScience

butcherguy
If this is true,
It is time to clean your guns, boys and girls.

Why would it be time to do that?

Are you suggesting that you think it is time that you are going to start killing people?

I didn't mention that.
Guns can have the effect of changing hearts and minds without being fired, much less killing people. You can see the effect when an armed police officer enters a room.

So you are going to clean you guns so you can hold them???

Why are you afraid to admit that you want to incite people to start getting into the thought mode of killing other people if they disagree with you.

It is quite obvious that is what you mean...but you know that is a stupid thing to say...so now you are back peddling. Maybe think before you post...quite possible some people could see your post as a threat and report it to authorities.

reply to post by AlienScience

So you are going to clean you guns so you can hold them???

I guess you keep your guns dirty?
It is called preventative maintenance. You change the oil in your car, don't you?

You are blaming me for inciting something?
Why don't you place the blame where it belongs.... on your boss, Obama.

the thought mode of killing other people if they disagree with you.

This is a complete fabrication.

butcherguy
reply to post by AlienScience

 

So you are going to clean you guns so you can hold them???

I guess you keep your guns dirty?
It is called preventative maintenance. You change the oil in your car, don't you?

You are blaming me for inciting something?
Why don't you place the blame where it belongs.... on your boss, Obama.

the thought mode of killing other people if they disagree with you.

This is a complete fabrication.

edit on 1-11-2013 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

So why is it the time to clean your guns? Why right now if it is always an ongoing maintenance thing?

So you are now trying to say you were just giving a friendly reminder to other gun owners to make sure they do their routine maintenance?

It is very clear what you are suggesting...you think gun owners should kill people for actions you think are against your "right" to own a gun.

Astyanax
reply to post by Hillbilly123069

 

I'm sure it sounds like treason to a hillbilly.

If your country is a signature to an international convention, it is so bound. If the convention is in conflict with your constitution, you must change your constitution.

Enough of this childish exceptionalism.

I think this has more to do with national sovereignty than "US exceptionalism," something I actually reject, and is not something supported by the U.S. Constitution. I also reject the UN as a ruling body. It's a joke.

nenothtu

Astyanax
reply to post by Hillbilly123069

 

I'm sure it sounds like treason to a hillbilly.

If your country is a signature to an international convention, it is so bound. If the convention is in conflict with your constitution, you must change your constitution.

Enough of this childish exceptionalism.

Negative, young constitutionally illiterate sir!

Additionally, an international accord that is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution is void under domestic U.S. law, the same as any other federal law in conflict with the Constitution.

Link

Article IV of the US Constitution says:

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

Note the phrase "under the authority of the United States". The authority for adherence to this treaty is specifically denied by Amendment II of the Bill of Rights. Furthermore, in the very first sentence of Article IV, it is specified that the laws implementing treaty provisions must be made in pursuance of the Constitution. That means that they cannot violate the Constitution.

If that's not enough, Article II of the US Constitution requires any treaty made by the executive to be ratified by a 2/3 majority of the Senate, which this one has not been.

No, young sir. They can bite my hillbilly ass.

I like you, Jack. I don't care what your background check says. Very informed. To the heckler, it's a nickname from a couple different things. My IQ is heap further from a 100 than 200. I know you'll have to think on that last for a few moments. You really want to freak yourself out, read the Book of Revelations. 2k plus year old book and it tells this will happen. Try to interpret it as would a 7 year old. The big question for me, who are the saints??

I don't think the SCOTUS would even go for this, so nothing to worry about there (but then again Roberts shocked the hell out of me when he approved Obamacare.) Even attempting this move sounds treasonous.

reply to post by AlienScience

It is very clear what you are suggesting...you think gun owners should kill people for actions you think are against your "right" to own a gun.

You certainly do read a lot that isn't there.
I don't think that anyone should kill anyone else, but that doesn't stop cops from doing it.
Let's see what you dream up and see that isn't there this time.

2nd amendment is not set in stone. The people put their heads together and gave a right to bear arms. The people can put their heads together and say "screw that 2nd, we dont need it". Jury nullification at it's finest.

I have a question for anyone willing to answer it.

Who are the one's who really benefit from the prices of guns and ammo sky rocketing when our government starts debating gun control.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for honest citizens owning any gun they want, but lobbyists are all over DC and agenda's of companies rule the government.

You know of course that our President is a former Consitutioal law professor don't you? I'm sure it was all cleared by the WH, so relax. The President and the government know exactly what they are doing. We are so lucky to have such a competent government, you're being ungrateful.

Astyanax
reply to post by Hillbilly123069

 

I'm sure it sounds like treason to a hillbilly.

If your country is a signature to an international convention, it is so bound. If the convention is in conflict with your constitution, you must change your constitution.

Enough of this childish exceptionalism.

Actually that's not true in the USA. The Constitution supersedes treaties, which supersede laws.

Otherwise a 2/3rds vote in the senate is a backdoor Constitutional amendment which it is not.

I didn't see any lame stream media sources listed. Not saying the story is false I am just wondering why this is in General Conspiracies? Unless it's unconfirmed or we have the original MSM articles in the other news forums? If this is true I would hope SCOTUS would laugh it out of court. No way does any treaty trump the US constitution. Not to US citizens anyhow. That's like going back in time to ancient Rome and saying Barbarian law trumps Roman law.

I would also like to point out what Buster pointed out:

buster2010
It says right in the treaty it changes no laws in any nation that signs it. The UN even has a resolution stopping that from happening. The resolution explicitly states that it is “the exclusive right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through constitutional protections on private ownership.” This only applies to international arms sales and the Constitution doesn't protect you outside the states.

Thank you for bringing some sanity to this discussion. If this ever did take place the American people would go ape. I do not think the current administration is suicidal. They are very anti-gun but they aren't retarded.

AlienScience

butcherguy
reply to post by AlienScience

 

So you are going to clean you guns so you can hold them???

I guess you keep your guns dirty?
It is called preventative maintenance. You change the oil in your car, don't you?

You are blaming me for inciting something?
Why don't you place the blame where it belongs.... on your boss, Obama.

the thought mode of killing other people if they disagree with you.

This is a complete fabrication.

edit on 1-11-2013 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

So why is it the time to clean your guns? Why right now if it is always an ongoing maintenance thing?

So you are now trying to say you were just giving a friendly reminder to other gun owners to make sure they do their routine maintenance?

It is very clear what you are suggesting...you think gun owners should kill people for actions you think are against your "right" to own a gun.

I have no problems with making it very clear to you in no uncertain terms. What is being discussed in the OP of this thread is treason, it's not debatable but for those that would seek to undermine and destroy this country through actions and forked tongues.

No Constitutional lawyer on Earth is going to convince Americans that the UN "small arms treaty" supersedes the United States Constitution because it doesn't, not under any argument and if you're going to say it does then I call you guilty of the same I would charge Eric Holder and his cohorts with.

If you think they can bring this to the SCOTUS and win, you're insane, if you think they can bring this to the SCOTUS and it does get passed and Americans do nothing about it, you're insane.

If for whatever reason, it was decided that United Nations treaties or resolutions were going to be honored instead of or above the United States Constitution then that would mean that the "United States" would be under attack by foreign powers giving every American the just right to take up arms in defense of the country. A gross attack on the Constitution, the document that gives our very government it's legitimacy is an attack on the whole of America and would justify any means to the ends to liberate our country from the usurpers.

It's not a question of agreeing or disagreeing, it's a question of the rule of law of the country. The government is not above it nor can it supersede it because the Constitution came first. There isn't an argument to be had, you follow the Constitution or you change it through legal means, you don't pretend it doesn't exist and continue as you see fit or you are a trader to this country, this republic and it's people.

That, is how it is and more than likely in my lifetime and yours, how it will be.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,

Read it closely, in fact, read it all, front to back because you have a poor understanding of not only the Constitution but what it actually means to be an American.

You can't sidestep our founding documents or the framework our country was built upon to satisfy your perceived ideals of what our country should be based on lofty ideology mostly forced fed to you by media. You don't get to decide what is right or what is wrong, we live in a republic, a republic governed by law and at the top the power structure lies the Constitution, your misplaced morality and need to fit in doesn't and will not ever supercede that.

reply to post by GNOarmy


Least read document? They read documents in DC?

Legislation sponsored by Ron Paul

Sunlight Rule. H.Res. 216, 2009-03-05, originally H.Res. 709, 2006-03-02. Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to ensure that Members have a reasonable amount of time to read legislation that will be voted upon. Prohibits votes on legislation from occurring until ten days after its introduction, with the intent of giving lawmakers enough time to read bills before voting on them; allots 72 hours for House members and staff to examine the contents of amendments. Paul charged his fellow legislators with voting for the Patriot Act in 2001 without reading it first; more than 300 pages long, it was enacted into law less than 24 hours after being introduced.[56]

buster2010
This treaty will change no laws here in the states. Cruz is just running his mouth without checking any facts.

Have you ever heard of 'case law' ? This will set a legal precedent for UN treaties to supercede the US constitution.

Seems the UN has been flexing its muscle more and more in the US lately.

www.forbes.com...

Krazysh0t
This is why I absolutely hate Eric Holder. The man knows nothing about the Constitution and does everything in his power to subvert it. He should be kicked out of office and all perks of the job stripped from him.

Hahaha! Do you really think that jacka$$ is making the calls? He is told what to do and he does what he is told, as simple as that. In fact, all the politicians obey to the same rules.

Peace out.

reply to post by Hillbilly123069


I don't know why we are screwed anymore by this Marxist/socialist/communist move then any of the other attempt's at destroying this country these clown's have perpetrated over the last five years.

What really bothers me is the fact the American people have not made a move to do anything about it.

Colorado recalled two people with success, one would think that might have given people the motivation to see that we do have the power to remove these people that would destroy America and mold it in there Marxist ideology...or not.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

You have to have two witnesses and proof the act is against the U.S. and giving comfort to the enemy, not so easy to prove beyond a doubt in the case of Eric Holder just doing what any lawyer would have to do in this case, also think about it, Treason is founded upon violation of English Law, it's too bad the U.S. can't be ruled and have all of those old statutes converted to say under U.S. law right? so really treason is not a valid law that can be really enforced technically , are we or are we not still under English Law, that is the question I would like to pose, and my other question who is the last person convicted of treason in the United States?

I know a lot of the Snowden fans that probably support Holder being charged with treason, yet think Snowden is a a hero.

butcherguy
The Chief Justice wrote a convoluted opinion describing at length the different ways that it is Unconstitutional, yet, after three pages, does a turnaround and says that the Court must try to salvage laws whenever possible??? Explain that one to me!

Easy, the Admin floated a few excerpts from the pillow talk phone conversations the NSA recorded between John Roberts and his mistress, along with the message "Justice Roberts... how would your wife, Jane feel about this affair?" I have little doubt that those recordings are probably still close to his mind should another important to the Admin case come before the SCOTUS and his vote of confidence is needed again.

reply to post by burdman30ott6


All of our "representatives" and judicial appointees have been blackmailed, they don't get in unless they are "blackmail-able".

This treaty to "disarm" americans is just a cog in their wheel of destruction.

Just wait until they claim "amnesty" for all the drug cartels in america - then, we will be a THIRD WORLD COUNTRY - with all of the bribing and corruption that is common place in the rest of the world.